Opinions?

[Nicholas A]

@sledge
I have never seen one that was visible on a hearts image.
The are usually very tiny.
They can be anywhere on the diamond but the most common is near the girdle on the pavilion.

I agree with @Karl_K but this is not the case here as proven with the updated ASET scope image that doesn’t exhibit this artifact. The only variable that changed was the holder used when photographing the diamond. Same diamond, same machine and camera just the holder changed. Diamonds that have this artifact of our photo setup will be re-shot for clarity.

I’ve actually never seen a diamond that had an additional facet in the middle of the pavilion. That would be a disaster in terms of cutting a MRB for a cutter.

Ciao

 

[Karl_K]

I’ve actually never seen a diamond that had an additional facet in the middle of the pavilion. That would be a disaster in terms of cutting a MRB for a cutter.

Ciao

I have it was on the junction of the mains and lower halves.

 

[SandyinAnaheim]

Both brands are respected and provide excellent service and product. I don’t think that our perception of which one is a more “prestigious” brand should influence OP in his decision making.

There is a $2.7k difference between VC’s 1.5 H VS1 and the closest WF 1.5 H VS1. I wouldn’t ignore that very important fact over someone’s opinion of the two brands.

I agree, and the original comment is just ONE poster's personal opinion, to which many would disagree, including me.

EDIT to add: Welcome to the board Nicholas! I hope you'll share your expertise with us frequently.

 

[Nicholas A]

I have it was on the junction of the mains and lower halves.

My question to you @Karl_K is do you know what happened to the cutter that did that? I wouldn’t like to have been in his shoes.

 

[Nicholas A]

EDIT to add: Welcome to the board Nicholas! I hope you'll share your expertise with us frequently.

Thank you for the beautiful welcome @SandyinAnaheim !

 

[SandyinAnaheim]

Il piacere è tutto mio Nicholas. Felice anno nuovo e benvenuto nel forum.

 

[Karl_K]

My question to you @Karl_K is do you know what happened to the cutter that did that? I wouldn’t like to have been in his shoes.

No clue but In my head it goes something like this:
Cutter 1..... I messed up how do we fix this?
cutter 2..... mumbles and polishes the extra facet.
Boss: good save!!!

rofl!!!!!!

Btw welcome to PS!!!!!!

 

[ccuheartnurse]

The Italians have invaded!

 

[worktoohard]

Okay I am totally lost with the h facet and the lingo! I still haven’t received a live video of the f yet. Now I’m wondering is from the info stated the h actually a great option? If so I would love to jump on it for the size. Maybe I could get someone to show me a video of that stone? If they are a vetted style place like the aca etc?

 

[SandyinAnaheim]

The Italians have invaded!

We've been here for quite some time my dear.

 

[sledge]

Okay I am totally lost with the h facet and the lingo! I still haven’t received a live video of the f yet. Now I’m wondering is from the info stated the h actually a great option? If so I would love to jump on it for the size. Maybe I could get someone to show me a video of that stone? If they are a vetted style place like the aca etc?

Did you contact WF today about the live video of the F VS2? If so, what kind of time frame did they promise you? I know you are anxious to make a decision but if they just learned today that you wanted a custom video, you need to allow them an ample opportunity to deliver excellence for you. They genuinely care about their customers and want you to have sufficient information to make a good intelligent decision so I'd wait 24 hours from your request and follow up if you don't already have the the data by then.

In regards to the VC 1.514 H VS1, please refer back to post #49:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/opinions.245959/page-2#post-4475691

In that response, you will see where I put the VC 1.514 next to the WF 1.565 H VS2 in an attempt to show you how the proportions were nearly identical on the two stones. Because they are so similar, I think the WF video of the 1.565 stone will be a decent representation of what you would receive if you went with the VC 1.514 stone.

Knowing that information, you can then compare the WF video of the 1.565 video against the WF video of the 1.48 stone and make a decision if you think that stone has as much fire and big bold flashes that you love and initially drew you to the 1.48 in the first place.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4066130,4070346,4054985,3925305

All the geek speak on the VC stone having an extra facet can be summarized pretty simply. If you've built anything with wood, you have probably had to deal with a knot at some point. In finished carpentry type project you sometimes cut out small knots and put wood filler back in their place.

Essentially this "extra facet" is a result of the same thing. The diamond exhibited some inclusion flaw that would have made it less than a VS1. They chose to cut it out and then fill it back in (add an extra facet). It's teeny tiny and may not even be detectable to you.

While I'm not in love with this type of inclusion, it doesn't really seem to affect beauty or symmetry in a significant way. It is about $2,000 cheaper than the 1.565 H VS2 and nearly $2,700 cheaper than the 1.48 F VS2.

It boils down to this:

• Does the personality of the WF 1.565/VC 1.514 stone speak to you the same as the WF 1.48 does?
• Are you okay dropping from F color to H color?
• Is it important to be able to say 1.5+ carat, or is 1.48 okay with your ego? Technically the stone is about 0.12mm bigger, but the size is so minor you won't be able to detect it with the naked eye.
• Do any of your answers change knowing you could pocket $2,700 going with the VC stone?

 

[sledge]

In regards to getting a video the VC 1.514 stone, it sounds like @Nicholas A is the guy to answer that question.

VC does vet their stones like WF but I am not sure what capabilities they have to do special requests for live videos like you want. I'd suggest reaching out to VC tomorrow and verifying.

 

[EvaEvans]

Both brands are respected and provide excellent service and product. I don’t think that our perception of which one is a more “prestigious” brand should influence OP in his decision making.

There is a $2.7k difference between VC’s 1.5 H VS1 and the closest WF 1.5 H VS1. I wouldn’t ignore that very important fact over someone’s opinion of the two brands.

Both brands have compatible price tag, but as a resell option in the future, it is easier to sell pre-owned WF ACA than pre-owned VC diamond.
Victor Canera is NOT cheaper than Withe Flash as you try to implant.
Cheaper is THIS PARTICULAR diamond and it is obvious why - because of the extra facet!
Also, I don't like the cut proportions of the WF 1.56, neither I like the cut proportions of VC 1.51.
Still the top option for me is the OP first diamond, 1.48 F VS2

VC price comparison and why the 1.51 H vs1 is so cheap?
1.51 H VS1 $12,560.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104097665004-1.514-h-vs1-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

1.502 H VS2 $13,899.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104097665002-1.502-h-vs2-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

1.50 H VS2 $13,899.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104095645004-1.500-h-vs2-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

Isn't is strange? Slightly smaller diamond, lower clarity, but higher price?!

 

[SimoneDi]

Both brands have compatible price tag, but as a resell option in the future, it is easier to sell pre-owned WF ACA than pre-owned VC diamond.
Victor Canera is NOT cheaper than Withe Flash as you try to implant.
Cheaper is THIS PARTICULAR diamond and it is obvious why - because of the extra facet!
Also, I don't like the cut proportions of the WF 1.56, neither I like the cut proportions of VC 1.51.
Still the top option for me is the OP first diamond, 1.48 F VS2

VC price comparison and why the 1.51 H vs1 is so cheap?
1.51 H VS1 $12,560.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104097665004-1.514-h-vs1-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

1.502 H VS2 $13,899.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104097665002-1.502-h-vs2-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

1.50 H VS2 $13,899.85
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/ags104095645004-1.500-h-vs2-ideal-hearts-arrows-round

Isn't is strange? Slightly smaller diamond, lower clarity, but higher price?!

I completely disagree with you. I haven’t seen many VC diamonds for sale on the secondary market and they have certainly been in the super-ideal business for a shorter period of time, but both vendors produce beautifully cut stones. @mrs-b has purchased form both vendors, so she can likely chime in with more insight.

If we talk resale value, CBI provides the greatest safety net with their 80% lifetime buyback. Everything else is subjective.

Yes, I agree that this particular diamond is cheaper, but I disagree that it is because of the extra facet on a VS1 diamond which virtually has no impact on performance.

Prices of the rough vary and we recently had a discussion that the prices of the rough have gone up. This stone was graded 1/16/18 so that is very much a possibility in my view, but perhaps @Nicholas A can comment.

@worktoohard you have been receiving quite a bit of feedback and opinions here, but know that despite our preferences, we want to support you in your decision making. All of the aforementioned vendors are excellent and produce beautiful diamonds.

I would reach out to both VC and WF and have them send you a video of one of the 1.5 H VS1/VS2 stones, next you a G and F stones just to see how the colors compare for your own sake. Then I would think about where you want to be in terms of pricing and also look at the setting selections. VC settings will be handforged and they are stunning. Nonetheless, WF can also execute excellent cas settings.

Ultimately, take your time and don’t get too overwhelmed by everyone’s opinions, all of your options are fantastic.

 

[EvaEvans]

@SimoneDi
I am not discussing the seller customer service, neither the quality of cut. I am discussing which brand is better known and has larger business. In my point of view buying a diamond is not only a jewelry entertainment, but also an investment.
Well cut diamonds at very reasonable price also have Blue Nile, James Allen, Adiamor, etc.
Here we are talking about BRAND NAME but you are mixing your arguments jumping from price to customer service to vendor reputation...

WF ACA is better known and more popular brand name than VC H&A

 

[SimoneDi]

@EvaEvans I don’t want to keep derailing here, nonetheless, I simply tried to respond to your statement about which “brand” is easier to resale. I disagree that there is a difference between the ease of selling stones from one vendor vs the other on the secondary market. I don’t think that it is something that could even be quantified due to all sorts of variables. It is easy to see a stone from which vendor you personally might buy on the secondary market, but the same is not valid for me and likely other people.

My additional comments regarding the vendors were not addressed to you.

Furthermore, diamonds are not an investment, they are a luxury purchase. Believing anything else is foolish. Once again, the only vendor that guarantees equity in the long run is CBI with their 80% lifetime buyback program.

I can respect your different opinion, this is what makes this forum so great, but this discussion has no further place on this thread as we are only confusing our OP.

 

[Nicholas A]

@sledge I think you are an asset to the PS community. I’ve read some of your posts and they’re very thoughtfully written . Your intention of trying to help people that come to these forums is plain. Because of this I know you wouldn’t intentionally give incorrect information BUT the fact that this diamond does NOT have an extra facet has already been established with the updated ASET scope image which I’m attaching here. Additionally, I can confidently say that no stone in our signature cut Canera Ideal Hearts line has what you’re describing. Why?

A) AGSL would note an additional facet like this on the lab report and deduct it from the Cut score.
B) This type of “mistake” is more like a train wreck that doesn’t happen with diamonds cut at this level of precision.
C) The stone would certainly just go back to manufacturing and be rejected IF something like this occurs - which never has.
D) Again, this is a quirk of our ASET scope image photo machine's diamond holder.

 

[Nicholas A]

I have to say though that the pricing of this diamond is a mistake on our part. This stone was priced at about $14k just a couple of weeks ago before we did a mass update using a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet referenced an incorrect cell and updated the wrong price of this diamond below the cost of materials and manufacturing of the stone.

Op, I apologize for this and if there’s something we can do to make it up for you, just let me know.

 

[Nicholas A]

@EvaEvans,
I haven’t come across a situation where a client has sold one of our CIH diamonds in the secondhand market because we happen to offer one of the industry’s best upgrade benefits with our platinum upgrade policy which offers a lifetime upgrade to a stone of equal or greater value from our inventory.

Ciao

 

[Karl_K]

@Nicholas A ,
The grading report says it has an extra facet.
AGSL would only deduct it from the grade if it impacted performance, symmetry(arguable it does, but its allowed) or polish grades.
That the extra facet is not causing the spot on the ASET image I agree.
Its most likely dust which would also explain why its not on the updated image.
That most of the time an extras facet does not impact performance to a large degree is already accepted.

 

[EvaEvans]

@Nicholas A
Technically extra facets are part of the cutting, but in fact they are considering flaws, although "man-made" flaws. To be considered part of the inclusions, the extra facet should be very small, that is true, otherwise will be considered flaw of the cut. However, the extra facet is one of the less desirable "inclusions".

 

[sledge]

Both brands have compatible price tag, but as a resell option in the future, it is easier to sell pre-owned WF ACA than pre-owned VC diamond.

I have to agree with @SimoneDi and say this is very subjective and speculative statement. So many variables go into selling/buying a pre-owned diamond, such as:

• Astigmatism with pre-owned stones vs "new" diamonds.
• Upgrade programs, financing, ability to use credit cards, etc.
• Trust issues -- buying from a reputable company vs unknown individual.
• Buyers budget and their own priority of the 4 C's and how that particular stone aligns with those constraints.
• Average Joe struggles to pick a decent GIA 3x stone, let alone to know, appreciate and properly value a super ideal stone at the level of detail you are suggesting.

I would agree that in this community most people are more familiar with WF ACA stones, and may even prefer them. Just as I think many people are more familiar and prefer the quality hand forged settings that VC produces.

Most people are still driven by budget constraints, so reverse logic could be argued and said that buying this particular VC stone would actually fair better in the used market as it could be bought cheaper and sold as an ideal H&A stone for less money than other super ideals. That will be attractive to certain buyers that have no brand preference or loyalty.

The harsh reality is that for most of us, selling in the used market will yield undesirable results period. Expect about 50-70 cents return. Yuck. For those that bought a CBI through HPD, you can get 80 cents return on the dollar, assuming you are the husband/wife that did the initial purchase. FYI, this was recently discussed in another thread and the 80% buyback does not extend beyond the original couple that purchased the stone. Also, I understand the 80% buyback is an HPD perk, not a CBI perk.

Yes, someone will undoubtedly have a result greater than I suggested above but those results would be classified as outliers and not typical. They exist, but one shouldn't expect them.

Especially when selling a super ideal in the used market would be indicative of a seller needing cash reserves for personal reasons (aka "fire sale"), wanting to jump brands (and the new vendor will not accept a trade-in), etc. The typical super ideal owner would be trading back in with the vendor if they were looking to unload their stone in typical fashion.

 

[Nicholas A]

@Karl_K The context of the extra facet in the thread here was with the ASET scope image which shows a quirk of our ASET photo set up implying that there is an extra face along the center part of the pavilion which is not the case. This type of extra facet would have been absolutely a deduction from AGSL. The extra facet on this particular diamond is on the girdle.

 

[sledge]

@sledge I think you are an asset to the PS community. I’ve read some of your posts and they’re very thoughtfully written . Your intention of trying to help people that come to these forums is plain. Because of this I know you wouldn’t intentionally give incorrect information BUT the fact that this diamond does NOT have an extra facet has already been established with the updated ASET scope image which I’m attaching here. Additionally, I can confidently say that no stone in our signature cut Canera Ideal Hearts line has what you’re describing. Why?

A) AGSL would note an additional facet like this on the lab report and deduct it from the Cut score.
B) This type of “mistake” is more like a train wreck that doesn’t happen with diamonds cut at this level of precision.
C) The stone would certainly just go back to manufacturing and be rejected IF something like this occurs - which never has.
D) Again, this is a quirk of our ASET scope image photo machine's diamond holder.

Thank you for the kind words @Nicholas A. I do genuinely try to help people and would not lead them astray intentionally.

To be clear, I was not making the assumption of an extra facet based on the ASET. It is because the AGS cert clearly identifies "extra facet" on the certification.

Below is a copy of your original cert (copied from the VC site):

Here is a copy of the image I did yesterday in post #49. Notice the comments in blue about the extra facet. This also came from the VC site, but was a screen capture of the specific area.

I have to say though that the pricing of this diamond is a mistake on our part. This stone was priced at about $14k just a couple of weeks ago before we did a mass update using a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet referenced an incorrect cell and updated the wrong price of this diamond below the cost of materials and manufacturing of the stone.

Op, I apologize for this and if there’s something we can do to make it up for you, just let me know.

Eek, when pulling the cert to paste above I noticed this stone has been price adjusted to $15,341.

 

[Nicholas A]

I’ve pulled up the full data on this diamond from AGSL which includes more information on the diamond than even on the lab report. There was no deduction for Performance Finish for this diamond even. It was Ideal across the board. The extra facet is listed as the third clarity setting grade on this stone and it’s already a VS1 clarity. This means that it’s the most minor of the three inclusion setting grades. If it was me, I would prefer a diamond that has this type of inclusion to having something like a crystal or feather inside the stone.

Ciao

 

[EvaEvans]

@sledge
Buying a brand name jewelry could be very profitable in a long term. For example, people who purchased a Tiffany & Co. piece of jewelry a 100 years ago return their investment 10x times.
Based on the diamond price for the last 10 years, I constantly see an increment. What is the problem is that the brand names are always overpriced compare with the same product non brand name.
To be honest, if I am buying a diamond, I will look at the quality of the stone, not the brand name. However, if I am considering 2 diamonds with very close parameters and similar price, I will have in consideration the brand name (if any).
Brand name jewelry is always in higher demand and always has better selling point.

 

[EvaEvans]

@Nicholas A
Looks like that this extra facet is a result of polishing out some inclusion to increase the clarity grade.
I would accept extra facet in non Ideal diamond, but giving my $$$ and having non-perfection - never!

 

[Nicholas A]

@Nicholas A
Looks like that this extra facet is a result of polishing out some inclusion to increase the clarity grade.
I would accept extra facet in non Ideal diamond, but giving my $$$ and having non-perfection - never!

That's a large stretch @EvaEvans and it's actually incorrect.
A perfect diamond in that case would be a D-FL stone but people people compromise on clarity and color to suit their budgets and preferences.

 

[EvaEvans]

That's a large stretch @EvaEvans and it's actually incorrect.
A perfect diamond in that case would be a D-FL stone but people people compromise on clarity and color to suit their budgets and preferences.

In the ideal case scenario that extra facet polished out some natural/indented natural. I would prefer naturals on the girdle, than extra facet. You only know what was there.

You agree that people "compromise" with the imperfectness to suit their budget. So your price of this diamond is reflecting that.

 

[Nicholas A]

In the ideal case scenario that extra facet polished out some natural/indented natural. I would prefer naturals on the girdle, than extra facet. You only know what was there.

You agree that people "compromise" with the imperfectness to suit their budget. So your price of this diamond is reflecting that.

@EvaEvans, that's your opinion which is totally fine.

The price of this diamond was a mistake on our spreadsheet when it was updated about two weeks ago. If somebody would like, they can go on a site like Way Back Machine or such which shows snapshots of webpages at specific times in the past and see that this diamond was priced at $14,414.85 before.

So again, another assumption has ended up being incorrect.